daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Railways

Railways (Inter)national commuter and freight trains



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 28th, 2013, 09:56 PM   #6401
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
They are making progress, but they are trying to leap from nothing to state of the art in a timespan that nobody has achieved before.

Japan, France and Germany have spent decades to get to their current designs and we all know they're still not flawless. People will get wary when China buys those high speed trains from abroad and claims within 2 years to have produced an improved version that is capable of much higher speeds.
As an example, let me outline the situation with the Siemens Velaro / CRH3 / CRH380B/CRH380C

China has fully digested the blueprints as more high-speed trains are produced every year - than Siemens has produced in the last 30years combined.
Some of the components of the CRH3/CRH380B/CRH380C are still obtained from Siemens, but they're working to replace these with cheaper/better alternatives.

I suspect that Changchun Railways actually has a larger R&D complex than Siemens has for the Velaro. This is based on the limited information available from each company, and the fact that the Chinese know they're being charged a premium for anything they buy from Siemens.

It's a similar situation in Qingdao with the CRH2/CRH380A (Kawasaki) and the CRH1/CRH380D (Bombardier). But it looks like they're a lot more self-sufficient in terms of technology and have a larger R&D complex than Changchun.
__________________

Pansori liked this post
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 29th, 2013, 12:19 AM   #6402
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

@foxmulder

Quote:
You are assuming China started from zero which is wrong.
In terms of HSR, he isn't far from being right. China Star was the fastest pre-import set, but was rapidly withdrawn from service. Most likely the reason being reliability-related.

Quote:
The main reason for higher speeds is the infrastructure not the trains themselves necessarily.
Correct, but as mentioned on many occasions before, the wear and tear at those speeds necessitates better technologies, or else the maintenance budget skyrockets/ things begin to break. Perhaps the engineers realised that the higher speeds were not ready to be implemented. Zhou Yimin, ex-director of HSR had the following to say:
“through the acquisition of foreign technology, pushed the system beyond the limits of reliability".

Perhaps this, or the justifiable fears of poor quality infrastructure after such massive scale and speed of construction (not to mention a corruption scandal) were what lead to the drop in top speeds, rather than the popular scapegoat of 'politics'.

Worth a read in regards to the speed drop: http://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/techno...o-far-too-fast

From: http://www.railway-technology.com/fe.../feature124824

The corruption scandal, as well as the speed with which the tracks have been built, sparked not only an outcry in the industry but also fears over the poor quality of the lines, which were meant to carry trains travelling at up to 380km/hr. Chinese and foreign engineers alike started questioning the long-term strength of the tracks, especially of the concrete used in bridges and viaducts under contracts awarded during the term of Liu Zhijun.


@Restless
Quote:
China has fully digested the blueprints as more high-speed trains are produced every year - than Siemens has produced in the last 30years combined.
Some of the components of the CRH3/CRH380B/CRH380C are still obtained from Siemens, but they're working to replace these with cheaper/better alternatives.
"Fully Digested" appears to be a relative - rather than an absolute - term when describing such matters. A quick read of this paper (which doesn't really say anything that isn't already broadly obvious) may help: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.e...ontext=ipbrief

Quote:
I suspect that Changchun Railways actually has a larger R&D complex than Siemens has for the Velaro. This is based on the limited information available from each company, and the fact that the Chinese know they're being charged a premium for anything they buy from Siemens.

It's a similar situation in Qingdao with the CRH2/CRH380A (Kawasaki) and the CRH1/CRH380D (Bombardier). But it looks like they're a lot more self-sufficient in terms of technology and have a larger R&D complex than Changchun.
If they had such impressive R&D complexes, would you not argue that they would be proud of the innovation they foster and as such, impress upon the industry the size and scale of the complexes?
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 12:52 AM   #6403
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Sopomon, I can tell you this about Chinese high speed tech: 380D will be last imported high speed train for China and 380A is a Chinese design. There is also "crh500" which is probably the prototype for the next generation high speed rail. It is very safe to say China has a very solid high speed technology right now and it is actively developing it. Rest is irrelevant.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 02:20 AM   #6404
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
@foxmulder



In terms of HSR, he isn't far from being right. China Star was the fastest pre-import set, but was rapidly withdrawn from service. Most likely the reason being reliability-related.
There is no question in terms of experience China is not in the same league as the more established players. However China Star is just one of many Chinese domestic HSR projects, China has a 16 year history of developing commercial HSR technology and has been operating high speed and quasi-high speed rail for 15 years. The history is short compare to Japan and France, but hardly starting from zero. Many domestic efforts were successful, such as DJJ1 Blue Arrow and DJF2 Pioneer who saw commercial service for ten years. Too bad they became available too late and MOR under the mandate to rapidly deploy HSR network in China couldn't afford to wait for their maturity, therefore opted for foreign imports. Sure it took China a while to develop those trainsets and many view them as opportunities wasted, but they provided China extremely valuable experience in designing and operating HSR, enabling China to quickly absorb foreign technologies and develop subsequent CRH trains.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Correct, but as mentioned on many occasions before, the wear and tear at those speeds necessitates better technologies, or else the maintenance budget skyrockets/ things begin to break. Perhaps the engineers realised that the higher speeds were not ready to be implemented. Zhou Yimin, ex-director of HSR had the following to say:
“through the acquisition of foreign technology, pushed the system beyond the limits of reliability".

Perhaps this, or the justifiable fears of poor quality infrastructure after such massive scale and speed of construction (not to mention a corruption scandal) were what lead to the drop in top speeds, rather than the popular scapegoat of 'politics'.

Worth a read in regards to the speed drop: http://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/techno...o-far-too-fast

From: http://www.railway-technology.com/fe.../feature124824

The corruption scandal, as well as the speed with which the tracks have been built, sparked not only an outcry in the industry but also fears over the poor quality of the lines, which were meant to carry trains travelling at up to 380km/hr. Chinese and foreign engineers alike started questioning the long-term strength of the tracks, especially of the concrete used in bridges and viaducts under contracts awarded during the term of Liu Zhijun.
There is no question that China has learned from practice that running trains at very high speed will incur significantly higher maintenance cost, and that will eat into railway operator's profitability. It was deemed acceptable compromise when China was seeking prestige in its HSR achievement, but in today's political environment it's no longer endorsed. There is no evidence suggest that there are widespread quality issues with HSR infrastructure in China, the fear of poor quality IMO is more of an uninformed one. Mr. Liu's personal greed aside, the man takes great pride in his work, that's why when the trains were doing record breaking high speed test runs he liked to stand right behind the driver. Not many railway officials in the world have the courage to do that, it means he has confidence in the train and the line his men built, does this sound like the person who will knowingly allow substandard viaducts to be build in exchange of money? The speed reduction was prompted by a drive to reduce operating cost as well as political pressure to adhere to President Hu's scientific development message. Many so called experts (mostly from western media outlets or airline industry backed publications such as Caixin) have spelled doom of Chinese HSR for two and half years now, yet the system continue to grow and have been providing the Chinese people with safe, reliable, and efficient means of transportation. The packed CRH trains and a huge drop in domestic air travel this year is the best testimony to Chinese HSR's success.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
@Restless

"Fully Digested" appears to be a relative - rather than an absolute - term when describing such matters. A quick read of this paper (which doesn't really say anything that isn't already broadly obvious) may help: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.e...ontext=ipbrief

If they had such impressive R&D complexes, would you not argue that they would be proud of the innovation they foster and as such, impress upon the industry the size and scale of the complexes?
I too wouldn't say China has fully digested all imported foreign technologies, but the Chinese are not aiming at merely reverse engineer the product, but rather learn from its design philosophy and inspire ideas to solve similar problems faced by the local effort. They are also taking a very practical view at this issue, for components that don't have a domestic equivalent they are still purchasing directly from the OEMs.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 02:59 AM   #6405
xinxingren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 269
Likes (Received): 71

On the safety question, why do they shutdown the east coast HSR line, and Hainan, when a typhoon comes by? What are the crosswind limits for these trains? How much water can they tolerate on the rails? Or is soil liquifaction the fear?
xinxingren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 03:04 AM   #6406
Silly_Walks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,978
Likes (Received): 836

What I would do, and what I think China is doing, is to learn from all the stuff you imported, and just change it SLIGHTLY, not even improve it necessarily, just so you can make a full domestic product without needing to pay royalties for train sets or parts you produce domestically.

The 380A is an example of this approach, I think, because it is based mostly on imported Japanese technology, but the Chinese often stress that it is mostly a new train.

Of course, the foreign companies whose technology they imported in the first place tend to see things differently as they are gonna be losing out on a lot of income while products very similar to their own are still being produced.
Silly_Walks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 04:29 AM   #6407
silent_dragon
What a wonderful world
 
silent_dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 146
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by xinxingren View Post
On the safety question, why do they shutdown the east coast HSR line, and Hainan, when a typhoon comes by? What are the crosswind limits for these trains? How much water can they tolerate on the rails? Or is soil liquifaction the fear?
It maybe because the train may topple over strong winds. The train is long thus wide surface area for the wind to slam. And besides it is a passenger train; so its relatively lighter than a freight train.
__________________
Civilization game player since CIV3 to CIV5.


Got computing brains or extra bucks? Support this Green tech INDIEGOGO Project Paperless Receipts
silent_dragon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 08:52 AM   #6408
M-NL
Mixed-mode traveller
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,158
Likes (Received): 274

It will not topple over, except maybe in really extreme typhoons. The real problem with cross winds is actually that it pushes the train sideways on the tracks. The wheels of a train are tapered and on a solid axle. Normally on a straight track the train will run with the wheels touching the track at an equal radius for both wheels. However with strong winds when the train is pushed sideways the wheel on the windward side runs with a slightly smaller radius and on the leeward side with a slightly bigger radius. It's like continuously driving through a corner without an actual corner. This causes both extra friction on the train and extra wear on the tracks. If the wind is strong enough the leeward side wheelflange may even touch the rail.
__________________
Public transport: Mode of transport that takes to much time to take you from the place you're not currently located, to the place you didn't want to go to, at a time that doesn't really suit you.

Norge78 liked this post
M-NL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 09:09 AM   #6409
M-NL
Mixed-mode traveller
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,158
Likes (Received): 274

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
You are assuming China started from zero which is wrong. China has a solid research background in rail technology.
Then answer this: Why still buy much more expensive foreign equipment when you have all that R&D and could have done the same yourself within a few years? The reality seems to be that they knew no amount of research could bring them up to scratch within a few years and opted to buy foreign to quickly learn the tricks.

It takes time to transition from a 'copy and improve' industry to a 'design from scratch' industry. China is still somewhere in between and for realising that and acting accordingly China has nothing to be ashamed of. All industrialising nations have gone through this same process.
__________________
Public transport: Mode of transport that takes to much time to take you from the place you're not currently located, to the place you didn't want to go to, at a time that doesn't really suit you.
M-NL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 10:12 AM   #6410
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
Sopomon, I can tell you this about Chinese high speed tech: 380D will be last imported high speed train for China and 380A is a Chinese design. There is also "crh500" which is probably the prototype for the next generation high speed rail. It is very safe to say China has a very solid high speed technology right now and it is actively developing it. Rest is irrelevant.
I don't doubt it. Why buy expensive foreign goods when you can make your own flavour of those technologies and produce it below cost? True, you could consider the 500 as next-gen, but it's little more than a test train, and strangely, I don't think anyone has seen it running in the year or so since it was unveiled? (I may be wrong)

However, the rest isn't really all that irrelevant when only a few years after construction finished on some lines, entire sections of railway are having to be replaced due to rushed construction and poor quality. This, and the lack of next gen tech, are actively limiting train speeds and preventing the goal of 380 km/h running from happening in the near future.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 10:25 AM   #6411
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
There is no question in terms of experience China is not in the same league as the more established players. However China Star is just one of many Chinese domestic HSR projects, China has a 16 year history of developing commercial HSR technology and has been operating high speed and quasi-high speed rail for 15 years. The history is short compare to Japan and France, but hardly starting from zero. Many domestic efforts were successful, such as DJJ1 Blue Arrow and DJF2 Pioneer who saw commercial service for ten years. Too bad they became available too late and MOR under the mandate to rapidly deploy HSR network in China couldn't afford to wait for their maturity, therefore opted for foreign imports. Sure it took China a while to develop those trainsets and many view them as opportunities wasted, but they provided China extremely valuable experience in designing and operating HSR, enabling China to quickly absorb foreign technologies and develop subsequent CRH trains.
While I agree, my original argument was that such a rapid development of domestic tech, to the extent that trains can be labeled export-worthy, is very unfeasible, thus most of the tech even in the latest domestically designed sets is at least a tweaked version of what they had purchased a few years ago.

While I disagree with your second paragraph, there isn't much one can do but agree to disagree, as the affairs of the railways ministry and HSR are very murky and anyone outside of those circles can only guess. However, in terms of infrastructure quality I would point out a few articles that hint otherwise (Although I'm sure you're aware of these):
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-rail-collapse
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...als-fraud.html
(The second one is only worth reading the first couple of quoted articles)
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 10:35 AM   #6412
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
Then answer this: Why still buy much more expensive foreign equipment when you have all that R&D and could have done the same yourself within a few years? The reality seems to be that they knew no amount of research could bring them up to scratch within a few years and opted to buy foreign to quickly learn the tricks.

It takes time to transition from a 'copy and improve' industry to a 'design from scratch' industry. China is still somewhere in between and for realising that and acting accordingly China has nothing to be ashamed of. All industrialising nations have gone through this same process.
In 2009, Siemens only supplied components for 18% of the order value for the CRH380B. And they need the trains now, rather than in a few years.

This is what I've found that is readily available on R&D staffing levels.

Siemens Krefeld - 2000 staff in design, development and production of the Velaro
CSR Sifang Qingdao - 2000 R&D staff in + 7000 production staff for the CRH380A

My read on the situation is that Qingdao have gotten everything they wanted from Kawasaki and are now self-sufficient.
But Changchun are somewhat behind with Siemens, so to catch up, they built a comparable R&D facility 2years ago

And remember that the railway ministry values competition between them, because then they get better/cheaper trains.

Last edited by Restless; August 29th, 2013 at 10:53 AM.
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 03:42 PM   #6413
Norge78
Registered User
 
Norge78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 471
Likes (Received): 388

Both these issues were discussed years ago.

Even if the inselaffe didn't know it, yet.
Norge78 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 04:23 PM   #6414
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
I don't doubt it. Why buy expensive foreign goods when you can make your own flavour of those technologies and produce it below cost?
huh?? China is exactly doing that. No one can claim any IP on 380A. And 380B/C is mostly produced by China.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
True, you could consider the 500 as next-gen, but it's little more than a test train, and strangely, I don't think anyone has seen it running in the year or so since it was unveiled? (I may be wrong)
Yeah, it is broken and not functioning since it is made in China.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
However, the rest isn't really all that irrelevant when only a few years after construction finished on some lines, entire sections of railway are having to be replaced due to rushed construction and poor quality.
This sounds to me more like a wish. We will see what will happen. Also I meant China has the technology and if it has it, it has it. We were discussing technology China possessed and developing. Not whether the lines will require repairs or not....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
This, and the lack of next gen tech, are actively limiting train speeds and preventing the goal of 380 km/h running from happening in the near future.
We will see this too. I least China has a target.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 05:43 PM   #6415
Restless
Registered User
 
Restless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: London
Posts: 2,170
Likes (Received): 271

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norge78 View Post
Both these issues were discussed years ago.

Even if the inselaffe didn't know it, yet.
Yup. It's like deja vu for me
Restless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 11:05 PM   #6416
xinxingren
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 269
Likes (Received): 71

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
However with strong winds when the train is pushed sideways the wheel on the windward side runs with a slightly smaller radius and on the leeward side with a slightly bigger radius. It's like continuously driving through a corner without an actual corner. This causes both extra friction on the train and extra wear on the tracks. If the wind is strong enough the leeward side wheelflange may even touch the rail.
I'd figured that much. I just wondered if anybody had any numbers for crosswind operating limits for these trainsets. I'm assuming that the design process might have included some testing, because there's not only the eastern seabord typhoons, some of the desert winds in the north and west get fairly brisk.
xinxingren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 11:28 PM   #6417
Sopomon
Hideous and malformed
 
Sopomon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 870
Likes (Received): 153

Quote:
Originally Posted by foxmulder View Post
huh?? China is exactly doing that. No one can claim any IP on 380A. And 380B/C is mostly produced by China.

Yeah, it is broken and not functioning since it is made in China.

This sounds to me more like a wish. We will see what will happen. Also I meant China has the technology and if it has it, it has it. We were discussing technology China possessed and developing. Not whether the lines will require repairs or not....

We will see this too. I least China has a target.
Of course not. Nothing can prevent the 380A from being sold in China. Only if it were to be exported would an IP suit have any effect. Kawasaki does believe otherwise, though.

It may well have the technology, fantastic, great news. But if it can't be used, then it's all for nothing. Like a Ferrari in Jersey (40 mph speed limit), it's a bit of a waste of effort. At the same time, you're misunderstanding many of my points and I suggest you look over the debate again before replying.
__________________
And he kicked so many rosebushes at her that eventually, Sasuke turned into a log.
Sopomon no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 29th, 2013, 11:58 PM   #6418
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
While I agree, my original argument was that such a rapid development of domestic tech, to the extent that trains can be labeled export-worthy, is very unfeasible, thus most of the tech even in the latest domestically designed sets is at least a tweaked version of what they had purchased a few years ago.

While I disagree with your second paragraph, there isn't much one can do but agree to disagree, as the affairs of the railways ministry and HSR are very murky and anyone outside of those circles can only guess. However, in terms of infrastructure quality I would point out a few articles that hint otherwise (Although I'm sure you're aware of these):
http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-rail-collapse
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogsp...als-fraud.html
(The second one is only worth reading the first couple of quoted articles)
I agree that currently exporting Chinese HSR is difficult especially when facing competition from established brands, one of the reason is also Chinese HSR are not that much cheaper than foreign ones, part due to the increasing labor cost and part due to strong domestic demand. You are right that we as outsiders can only express our own opinions because ultimately we do not have access to all the facts. Regarding the articles I think the first one has been discussed in length here at the conclusion was that The Guardian was sensentionizing the story by using the term "collapse" since what really happened was that the foundation sunk for a few millimeters which actually exceeded the extremely tight quality control tolerance. If that's considered collapse I guess railways are collapsing everyday here in the US.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
However, the rest isn't really all that irrelevant when only a few years after construction finished on some lines, entire sections of railway are having to be replaced due to rushed construction and poor quality. This, and the lack of next gen tech, are actively limiting train speeds and preventing the goal of 380 km/h running from happening in the near future.
I'm curious as to which "entire sections" of HSR have been replaced due to poor construction quality? Also which next gen tech that China doesn't have to run the trains at 380km/h? China safely operated 350km/h trains for a couple of years, and everything was in place to start 380km/h service. The issues CRC faced regarding very high speed service were operating cost related, problems not yet conquered by Western OEMs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-NL View Post
Then answer this: Why still buy much more expensive foreign equipment when you have all that R&D and could have done the same yourself within a few years? The reality seems to be that they knew no amount of research could bring them up to scratch within a few years and opted to buy foreign to quickly learn the tricks.

It takes time to transition from a 'copy and improve' industry to a 'design from scratch' industry. China is still somewhere in between and for realising that and acting accordingly China has nothing to be ashamed of. All industrialising nations have gone through this same process.
They bought those foreign brands because they could not wait a few years. As I have pointed out a number of China HSR projects were set to become commercially available in 2004 when the decision was made to deploy nationwide HSR network. However they wanted to be able to finish most of the network while labor and land acquisition cost are still low, waiting a few years for the domestic trains to become available was not affordable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norge78 View Post
Both these issues were discussed years ago.

Even if the inselaffe didn't know it, yet.
Yeah I remember the discussions back then, but this is still a interesting topic and warrants periodical revisits.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2013, 12:09 AM   #6419
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Of course not. Nothing can prevent the 380A from being sold in China. Only if it were to be exported would an IP suit have any effect. Kawasaki does believe otherwise, though.

It may well have the technology, fantastic, great news. But if it can't be used, then it's all for nothing. Like a Ferrari in Jersey (40 mph speed limit), it's a bit of a waste of effort. At the same time, you're misunderstanding many of my points and I suggest you look over the debate again before replying.
Honest question, when did Kawasaki raise IP issue with CSR about CRH380A? Japan never exported >350km/h very high speed train technology to China and I don't think China can make a 250km/h train (max tested speed 362km/h) go 380km/h (max tested speed 486km/h) while continuingly use the same Japanese technology. If China wants to export CRH2, sure Kawasaki is justified to be mad, but not so for the 380A.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 30th, 2013, 12:24 AM   #6420
foxmulder
Registered User
 
foxmulder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2,135
Likes (Received): 382

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sopomon View Post
Of course not. Nothing can prevent the 380A from being sold in China. Only if it were to be exported would an IP suit have any effect. Kawasaki does believe otherwise, though.

It may well have the technology, fantastic, great news. But if it can't be used, then it's all for nothing. Like a Ferrari in Jersey (40 mph speed limit), it's a bit of a waste of effort. At the same time, you're misunderstanding many of my points and I suggest you look over the debate again before replying.
I think it is a little bit faster than "a ferrari in jersey"





As a side note, make your point clear if you can, what is your point? Do you think China does not have the technology or is not developing it or does not have the ip of the tech it has or its infrastructure is bad???? What is it oo wait... all of above, right?

When you spend 1 trillion dollar on a sector, you lead it. There are no two ways about it. No other country, even though their lines are much shorter, do not have high speed trains averaging 300km/h.
__________________

Pansori, geometarkv liked this post

Last edited by foxmulder; August 30th, 2013 at 12:57 AM.
foxmulder no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
china, high speed rail

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium